Until this most recent flare-up of tensions between the Koreas, business has thrived in the complex despite moments of cross-border conflict. As of early 2013, 53,000 North Korean employees in the complex collected around $90 million a year in wages, an important source of income for the impoverished North.

But the shutdown is a terrible financial blow for the South, as well. The South Korean government estimates [ko] the loss caused by the end of operations will be around one trillion Korean won (about 902 million United States dollars), while the companies involved claim [ko] it could surpass ten trillion won (about 9.02 billion US dollars).

South Korean hawks have flooded the Web welcoming the news of the country's withdrawal from the industrial complex, while others lamented the loss of the cooperative effort between North and South.

Some net users pointed out the shutdown means more than financial consequences:

@tenelux: The loss of companies in the Kaesong Complex can amount to 10 trillion Korean won […] Worse, what if that space is replaced with long-range missiles? It will only increase the national security risk.

@histopian: By building Kaesong Complex, the North’s army [in the region] moved 15 kilometers to the north [from their previous frontline]. The complex, furthermore, has made 50,000 North Korean workers think highly of South Korea’s [free-market economic] system and be willing to learn about it. Apart from pure economic profits aside, the military benefits should not be ignored. [link to related news article]

This particular tweet [ko] highlighting the significance of the Kaesong Complex has been retweeted more than 280 times:

@jiksseol: Kaesong Industrial Complex is more than a place where they churn out products. It is where peace was made and it was a living monument of peace, and one of the most realistic buffer zones between two Koreas.

Intense verbal conflicts erupted online between hawkish conservatives and progressives who support the “Sunshine Policy” that made Kaesong possible in the first place. Under this policy, South Korea gave various economic aids to the North, so that “sunshine” would create a wedge between the North Korean regime and its people and eventually lead to reform from the inside. Conservatives lashed out at the North for politicizing the venture for years and even pointed the finger at the former South Korean president who initiated the venture. Since the Complex's opening in 2004, operations have intermittently halted as the North uses it to express its displeasure with the South by refusing South Koreans entry to the Complex:

@cosmicgag: Some people falsely claim that Kaesong has been a [good] communication channel between the two Koreas that maintained peace. But think what the North did so far: did they warn us about their shelling and missile launch via Kaesong Complex? [No.] Don't kid yourself. It is not funny at all. You progressive scammers and pro-North people need to wake up.

@gvoice01: Kaesong Industrial Complex has been never been “the bridge to peace”, but rather the hostage [held by the North]. Every problem has originated from North Korea.

The mainstream media's use of the word “hostage” in its characterization of any South Korean worker in the Kaesong Complex has fueled accusations of biased, sensational reporting. Actually, the workers who actually stayed at the Complex said [ko] their stay was not unusual, with plenty of water and food no physical threats from North Korean side whatsoever. Some net users chimed in:

@sh4corea: Conservative media’s coverage on the Kaesong Complex is all sham. They claim that the North “held [South Korean] workers hostage” since they “cannot let go of the cash cow”, but actually the North did not ask, not even one worker, to stay. [Some media outlet's headline read] “The government pulled off the hostage-rescue operation”. It is a far-fetched 007 story co-written by the media and the government. Kaesong is not a subject of spy novel or movie.

As South Korean companies in the Kaesong Complex are facing near bankruptcy by the current crisis, some of them are planning to file a lawsuit against the government for their astronomical financial loss. Discussions formed around how to understand the case — whether to treat it as an ordinary civil loss in need of government help, or a damage inflicted by the government itself:

@murutukus: When companies in the complex file a lawsuit against the government, how should the court treat this case? Since it was damage done by the change of the government’s North Korean policy, should it be treated as “compensation” or “reparation“

Support our work

Global Voices stands out as one of the earliest and strongest examples of how media committed to building community and defending human rights can positively influence how people experience events happening beyond their own communities and national borders.